November 6, 2003

W. Bateman called the meeting to order in Room 223 of the Student Union Building at 4:01 PM.

Present: Marilyn Baguinon, Deborah Barlieb, William Bateman, Jorie Borden, Emily Button, Dan Cates, James Chaney, Janice Chernekoff, Joan Davis, Miles DeCoster, Peggy Devlin, Linda Goldberg, Bruce Gottschall, Amadou Guisse, James Hall, Beth Herbine, Paula Holoviak, Deryl Johnson, Patricia Kelleher, Kevin Kjos, Lisa Ladd-Kidder, David Laubach, Carol Mapes, Robert Martin, John McAndrew, George Paterno, Morris Perinchief, Ilene Prokup, Dennis Rains, Neil Shea, Andrew Skitko, Judith Smith, David Tavakoli, John Vafeas, Edward Vicic, Bob Watrous, Dana Wilcox, Clark Yeager

Absent: Eric Beaven, Pascale Dewey, Dennis Dietrich, James Hvidding, Joseph Lippincott, Charles Roth, Gail Rothermel, Paul Sable, James Sowerwine, Raymond Tumbleson, and a representative from the Department of Accounting and Finance

Others in Attendance: Dr. Cevallos, Deborah Lynch, and Marie Squerciati

I.    Announcements

W. Bateman gave the Senate an update on the condition of Donna Trabosh, University Senate Secretary, and he invited members to make cash donations so that restaurant gift certificates could be purchased for her.

W. Bateman announced that there would be an election of Senate Vice President and Secretary at the December meeting that would take effect for the next academic year. M. Perinchief is not eligible to run again for the position of Vice President because of term limits. D. Johnson has decided not to run again for secretary. W. Bateman asked for volunteers for the Nominating Committee. If he does get three volunteers within a few days, he will appoint the members of the committee.

W. Bateman reminded the Senators that the Scholarship Ball is being held on Saturday, November 8.

M. Baguinon moved, M. Perinchief seconded, to approve the Agenda. The motion passed.

B. Gottschall moved, B. Watrous seconded, to approve the Minutes of the October 2, 2003 meeting. The motion passed.

A. Strategic Planning and Resources Committee

P. Devlin, Vice Chair of the Strategic Planning and Resources Committee, announced that there would be an open session/presentation in December. E. Simpson is the chair of that body.

B. General Education Restructuring Team

Chair D. Lynch reported that the first open-faculty meeting of the Team held earlier in the day at 11:00 AM to discuss the Critical Thinking goal. The next meeting to discuss Goal 2 will be held on November 13, 2003, at 11:00 AM. D. Lynch stressed the need for faculty involvement since changes to General Education must be faculty driven. W. Bateman reminded everyone that the General Education website address is listed on the University Senate agenda. After D. Wilcox suggested the need for a student representative on the General Education Restructuring Team, D. Lynch replied that the committee was still hoping to have one appointed by SGB.

A. Academic Standards and Policy Committee Proposal on Plus/Minus Grading

W. Bateman introduced the topic of the plus/minus grading proposal. He advised the Senators that this is a very complex issue and that they should take their time making a decision since it is doubtful that the change could even be implemented by Fall 2004. To facilitate discussion, W. Bateman announced that there would be a roll-call straw vote where D. Johnson would call out each Senator's name and he or she would have the opportunity to speak briefly and indicate whether they are leaning toward (1) no change, (2) the proposal from the ASAP Committee, (3) a full plus/minus grading system, or (4) no answer. The final vote tally was (1) 9, (2) 11.5, (3) 12.5, and (4) 5.

B. Martin moved, M. Perinchief seconded, to take the Academic Standards and Policy Committee plus/minus grading proposal off the table. The motion passed. The floor was then opened for discussion. Several Senators made comments about the proposal. In response to a question from a Senator, W. Bateman invited the Senators who voted for Option 3, to respond whether they could live with Option 2. It was generally agreed among those who were leaning toward option (3) that some form of change would be better than no change. Again in response to a question from a Senator, W. Bateman asked Senators who voted for Option 2 whether they could live with Option 3. Again the sentiment seemed to be that change was better than no change.

P. Kelleher moved to amend the Academic Standards and Policies (ASAP) motion to add the grades of C-, D+ and D-, and change the numeric values to ± 1/3 for pluses and minuses. B. Herbine seconded the amendment. G. Paterno suggested that the two issues should be separated so that the numerical change would be considered later. P. Kelleher and B. Herbine agreed to delete the numeric value change from their motion to amend. Thus, the motion was to add the three new grades, C-, D+ and D-, to the ASAP proposal. Discussion followed.

D. Rains moved to amend the amendment by adding A+ in as an additional new grade. D. Cates seconded the motion. Discussion on the amendment to the amendment to add A+ followed. Speaking in favor of an A+, C. Mapes suggested that an A+ could be counted 4.00 and one could move by one-quarters down to C- which would count 2.00. There was a call for a vote on the question. There was an objection to the call. W. Bateman announced that a two-thirds majority was needed to cut off debate. The vote was 21 in favor of closing the debate and 11 in favor of continuing the debate. Since that was not a two-thirds majority, debate continued. A second call for the question was not objected to. A voice vote was taken and the amendment to add A+ failed.

J. Davis called the question on the original amendment to add the grades of C-, D+ and D-. There were no objections to the call. A vote was taken by raising hands. The motion passed by a 20 to 9 margin. At this point, B. Herbine moved to have the revised proposal taken back to the students and other constituencies. W. Bateman indicated that the motion was premature because the body had not yet considered the numeric values of the new grades and the question of whether a referendum of the entire faculty or a vote of the Senate would be taken to approve the matter of plus/minus grading.

On the matter of numerical values for the various grades, C. Mapes moved, D. Rains seconded, to amend the proposal to have increments of one-third between grades. Hence, the proposed values for grades would be: A (4.00), A- (3.67), B+ (3.33), B (3.00), B- (2.67), C+ (2.33), C (2.00), C- (1.67), D+ (1.33), D (1.00), D- (0.67), and F (0.00). Following discussion, M. Perinchief called for the question. The motion passed by an 18 to 12 margin.

W. Bateman moved on to question of whether a referendum of the entire faculty would be required to approve plus/minus grading or whether it would be approved on the basis of a vote of the University Senate. D. Rains moved, J. Hall seconded, to amend the motion to have a faculty referendum run by the Senate office. The motion to have a faculty referendum passed by a 23 to 6 margin.

After concerns raised by student Senators that this was moving too fast, L. Ladd-Kidder moved, M. Baguinon seconded, to table the proposal until the next meeting of the Senate so that Senators could take the amended proposal back to their constituencies. The vote was 18 in favor and 12 opposed. The motion carried by an 18 to 12 margin. W. Bateman will compose an e-mail letting everyone know where the proposal stands.

VI.    New Business VII.    Adjournment

B. Gottschall moved, M. DeCoster seconded, to adjourn the meeting. The motion passed. The meeting was adjourned at 5:58 PM.



Signed:

__________________________________	__________________________________
William E. Bateman, President	Deryl B. Johnson, Secretary


 

Back to University Senate Home Page



last updated:  November 14, 2003